Local officials want to retain control over cell antennas

Some local officials say they are worried a set of amendments contained in the House version of a state economic development bill could prevent towns and cities from maintaining control over wireless antennas.

The City Council voted on Monday to approve a resolution urging lawmakers to reject sections 74 and 75 of the House of Representatives’ economic development bill. The amendments, officials say, would strip local officials of their ability to control where telecommunications antennas can be placed and their capability to place restrictions on how the equipment is installed.

The House version of the bill, along with a companion Senate bill that does not include the antenna amendments, has been sent to conference committee. The resolution approved by the City Council Monday night asks committee members to report out a bill that does not contain the language included in the House bill.

Geoffrey Beckwith, executive director of the Massachusetts Municipal Association, said that the organization has been urging lawmakers to push for an economic development bill without the antenna provisions. City Councilor Kathleen Robey, who submitted the resolution, said she did so after hearing about the language through a communication from the Massachusetts Municipal Association.

Beckwith said on Thursday that the provision would allow a telecommunications company to place an antenna or equipment on virtually any existing structure while eroding local officials’ abilities to control aspects of the installations like aesthetics and noise emissions.

"It would allow all these powerful interests to do whatever they want on essentially any building in these communities as long as they have an agreement with the property owner," said Beckwith.

Federal law prohibits towns and cities from blocking the expansion of wireless networks, but municipalities can have a say in where those antennas might be placed or regulate the manner in which they must be installed. In Marlborough, for example, a special permit is required for the installation of a wireless antenna or any significant changes to an existing antenna.

The amendments in the House bill, Beckwith said, would allow telecommunications companies to place wireless antennas on existing facilities without being constrained by local zoning laws. The antennas only have to comply with state zoning code and must be on a building that was constructed legally, Beckwith said. If the building is on a historical register, a company would have to get approval from the state historic preservation office, but the proposal wouldn’t have to pass muster with any local historical boards.

"The only way they would be able to deny an application for an antenna would be if it violated the state building code," Beckwith said. "It would actually strip cities and towns of authority."

The Federal Communications Commission is developing guidelines for wireless communications facilities, which are due out this fall. Beckwith said in the interim, wireless telecommunications companies have been lobbying state governments across the country to pass laws making it easier for them to expand.

Page 2 of 2 - The antenna amendment passed the House on a voice vote and did not generate any debate, Beckwith said. It was sponsored by state Rep. Thomas Golden, D-Lowell, whose office did not return a call for comment Thursday.

Robey said she is hopeful that legislators will listen to local officials and produce a bill that doesn’t contain the amendment. She said officials don’t want to stop wireless companies from expanding their network to serve consumer needs, but want to ensure that the antennas are installed properly.

"Many people at the local level are upset that the cell phone industry is pushing this," she said. "We don’t want to stop progress, but we want to make sure that there is the ability to work with the cell phone companies."

Kendall Hatch can be reached at 508-490-7453 or khatch@wickedlocal.com. Follow him on Twitter @Kendall_HatchMW.